As we race toward today's climactic series of votes on passage of health care reform, Pelosi starts the day a few votes shy of passage.   But it is hardly unheard of for members to flip at the last minute.  Here is a list of key members to watch today.  The bottom line is that Pelosi probably has to flip 3 or 4 already-declared nays to yeas or a similar number of "Stupak Democrats" in order for these bills to pass, in addition to having all the undecideds vote "nay," and hoping there are no wild cards who vote "nay" out of the blue out there.  Each undecided or wild card who votes "nay" has to be offset by an additional Stupak member or "nay to yea" vote.

Undecideds who voted "nay" in November:

Brian Baird (Southwest Washington St.) -- Fiscally conservative Democrat who is retiring.  Wants to see an increased emphasis on cost savings.

John Tanner (Northwest Tennessee)  -- Also retiring.  Made disparaging comments to New York Times about bill.

Lincoln Davis (Southern Tennessee) -- Only "nay" from November who hasn't made some sort of comment on the record.   He represents an R+13 district and may be waiting, hoping the leadership won't need him.

Undecideds who voted "yea" in November:

Bill Foster (Western Chicago exurbs) -- Quasi-Freshman won Dennis Hastert's district in a special election in 2008 against a weak Republican.  Has to worry about the 2010 elections.

Paul Kanjorski (Scranton, PA) -- Scranton-area Congressman is in a tough re-election battle, and represents a district including Sallie Mae.  Does not like the education reform package tacked onto the reconciliation bill.

Mike Michaud (Northern Maine) -- Strangely quiet union Democrat from northern Maine. May have "Steve Lynch issues" (see below).

Solomon Ortiz (Corpus Christi, Texas) -- Hispanic caucus member has been quiet.  He is pro-life, pro-immigrant, and is generally fiscally moderate.  He was a late decider last time, and may be hoping that the leadership doesn't need his vote this time.

Earl Pomeroy (North Dakota) -- Congressman is in the race of his life, is polling poorly in North Dakota.  Probably does not want to vote "yea," though he would still have a hard time walking back earlier "yea" vote.

Stupak Bloc:

These are the ten suspected Stupak Democrats, though the leadership may already have peeled off a few of them:  Costello (Southwest Illinois and East St. Louis), Donnelly (North-Central Indiana, South Bend), Driehaus (Cincinnati and northern suburbs), Lipinski (Southwest Cook county/Chicago), Stupak (Upper Peninsula of Michigan, northern "glove"), Berry (Arkansas Delta), Dahlkemper (Erie, PA), Mollohan (Wheeling and Morgantown WV), Kaptur (Toledo), Rahall (Beckley/Coal Country, WV).

If Pelosi flips all ten Stupak Democrats -- and there are rumors a deal is near (though those rumors have been floating around all week) -- then this is probably effectively over.  Only a revolt among pro-choice members (see below), or losing almost all of the remaining undecideds would prevent passage.  I'd put the odds of that occuring at 5%.

Wobbly Nays:

These are declared "nays" that I suspect the leadership may be able to flip back, though they will be tough:

Steve Lynch (South Boston).  Did not like the "deem and pass" manuever.  Also unhappy with the Cadillac tax.

Mike Arcuri (Utica, NY) -- Rules committe member who almost lost in 2008.  Facing a rematch with 2008 opponent in a much worse political environment.

Michael McMahon (Staten Island) -- Staten Island Democrat who may end up voting with the rest of his delegation.

Rick Boucher (Southwest Virginia) -- Decided fairly late that he was still a "nay."  He'd be  a tough flip, but he generally tries to vote with the leadership.

Wild Cards

Loretta Sanchez (Central Orange County, CA) -- Voted "yea" last time after voting against the rule.  Roll Call reports that she may not even show up for the vote.

Michael Capuano (Cambridge) -- Spoke out against the bill from the left, but has since been quiet.  Will probably vote yes.

The pro-choice caucus -- This is probably the key.  Part of the reason Stupak language was removed from the bill is that some 40 members promised to vote against a final conference report if it contained Stupak language.  If Obama makes some sort of executive order promise in order to bring Stupak on board, keep an eye on Diana DeGette (Denver), Nita Lowey (Westchester County), and Mike Quigley (Chicago).

It has been a roller coaster 24 hours for the President's health care reform effort.  The Democrats have convinced a number of former "no" votes to commit to voting "yes."  At the same time, a few former "yes" votes have flipped over to "no."  Whip counts vary, but the various counts have the yeas and nays at around 208.  216 votes are needed for passage.

This is complicated by the uncertainty surrounding the size of the so-called "Stupak bloc," which is not included in this count.  These are Democrats who normally would vote for health care reform, but want stronger anti-abortion language inserted into the bill.  These Democrats are described as Costello (IL-12), Donnelly (IN-02), Driehaus (OH-01), Lipinski (IL-03), Stupak (MI-01), Berry (AR-01), Dahlkemper (PA-03), Mollohan (WV-01), Kaptur (OH-09) and Rahall (WV-03).  Reports have Stupak saying that his intial bloc of 12 had been sliced in half, but it is unclear whether he was referring to his intial group (which lost members like Oberstar and Kildee), or to the group that he had recently put together  (which added members like Berry and Donnelly).

There are also a few undecided members still lingering out there.  Three remaining "no-to-yess" votes could be found among retiring Reps Baird (WA-03) and Tanner (TN-08), and Lincoln Davis (TN-04).  Baird has been skeptical about the cost provisions and said he wanted to read the CBO report carefully, Tanner had made disparaging comments about the bill to the New York Times earlier in the month, and Davis represents an R+13 district.   They're get-able, but they are tough "gets."

In addition, the leadership has to fret about a few potential yes-to-no votes:  Depending on what reports you believe, those are probably Foster, Kanjorski (who has a tough race and Sallie Mae in his district, and therefore doesn't like the nationalized student loan aspect of the reconciliation bill), Michaud, Ortiz and Pomeroy.  In particular, watch Pomeroy, who is in a tough race in a very Republican state.

The bottom line is that to pass health care reform, Democrats need to make or maintain "yes" votes out of all these members, and then peel off at least a couple of the ten Stupak Democrats (assuming they haven't already done so), or switch some of the other hard nays to yea (watch Arcuri and Lynch).  That's not impossible, but it is a tall order.  In addition, they have to hope that there aren't any other brush fires waiting out there.  To give an example, members aren't certain that Loretta Sanchez will show up to vote, or that she would vote yea again (she voted against the rule last time before finally voting for the bill).  And if the President moves to compromise with the Stupak Democrats, pro-choice members might revolt.

That amounts to a pretty heavy lift for Democrats.  But there is a bigger picture to remember here.  The story of Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky – the deciding “no-to-yes” vote on Bill Clinton's 1993 budget – has been repeated many times.  But what is often left out of the story is that, on the morning of the vote, she was on television stressing to her constituents that she was a “no” vote.  Or consider the case of Robin Hayes, who represented an anti-trade, textile manufacturing district in North Carolina.  In 2001 he cast the deciding vote for trade promotion authority after being pressured so hard he reportedly was crying on the House floor.  Hayes began the week of July 24, 2005 reporting that he was "flat-out, completely, horizontally opposed to CAFTA;” by the 27th, he was a yes.  You can also look no further than the December Senate vote.  As of Friday, December 18, there was no reason to suspect that Ben Nelson would be a “yes” vote for Obamacare, yet there he was on Saturday, announcing proudly his new “Nelson” language and what would later be known as the “Cornhusker Kickback.”  Then again, this has been debated endlessly for over a year and intensely for a few months; it is difficult to see what else members could be threatened with.

In other words, these declarations of "I will vote no" are fairly meaningless to me until the vote is closed.  I'm inclined to believe a statement like Dan Boren's:  “They can break my arms. They can do whatever they want to. They'll never get my vote — ever. They'll have to walk across my dead body if they want my vote on this issue.”  But unless a member makes a categorical statement like that, they are up for grabs in my book.

Some have suggested that the parade of "nays" late Saturday meant that Pelosi has the votes.  Don't buy that.  The parade of "nays" is what you would expect if Pelosi had the votes, but then again, it is also what you would expect if she didn't have the votes.  At the end of the day, I think the President wouldn't be talking about an executive order on abortion rights if this were wrapped up.

Tomorrow should be an interesting day.  These are the members to watch.  When you see movement from these players, pay attention.  Right now I wouldn't put the odds of passage anywhere near the 80 or so that Intrade is predicting.  But given the enormous pressure the President and leadership will be bringing tomorrow, I'd have a hard time putting them much lower than 50%.

Yesterday was an absolute roller coaster for observers of the health care whip count.  Some members thought to be crucial to the passage of health care reform came out against the bill:  Altmire,Teague and a few others came out as "nays."  At the same time, new headaches popped up for the leadership, as Peter DeFazio -- a no vote on the stimulus from the left -- threatened to vote "no" on the health care bill unless there was additional Medicare funding, which funding would in turn threaten the deficit reduction in the reconciliation bill.  And then the leadership secured some tough "yes" votes:  Allen Boyd, Brad Ellsworth, Suzanne Kosmas, Henry Cuellar, Harry Mitchell and Scott Murphy came out in support.

But by the end of the day, it was very clear that the whip counts were in trouble.  Nancy Pelosi was left having to more-or-less run the table under either the Firedoglake or The Hill whip counts, with a very tough group of undecideds, including members thought to be leaning no:  Marcy Kaptur, Glenn Nye, John Tanner, Kathy Dahlkemper, Jim Matheson, and a few others.  And that assumes there's no more Lynch/DeFazio/Capuano headaches lurking out there, which is far from certain.  Pelosi could probably flip a "no" or two to "yes" if need be, but there was an awful lot of flipping that would have to occur to get this through.

I think the clearest indication that Pelosi didn't think she had the votes going this route is that she reportedly is now allowing Bart Stupak to introduce his abortion language.  I'm not sure exactly how this would work, but apparently there is a procedural mechanism for it.

This is a huge gamble for Pelosi.  If this is the road she's taking, she's assuming that the left-most members of her caucus won't bolt.  I'm not sure that's true.  Devoted pro-choicers like Diana DeGette, Nita Lowey, and Louise Slaughter held their nose and supported Stupak the first time around because they had assurances that it would be stripped by the Senate.  Now it will be the law of the land.  The progressive caucus is already holding its nose due to the lack of a public option; Pelosi may pick up twelve "Stupak" Democrats, but lose twenty pro-choicers.  I just don't know.

This is far from over, and anyone trying to put odds on this is fooling themselves.  I wouldn't be able to disagree with anyone who told me the odds of passage were around 30%, nor with someone who placed them at 70%.  We're in a universe where no one knows what is going on, where every procedural mechanism in the book is being pulled out to get this through, and where probably the most pro-choice President and Congress in history are possibly prepared to hand pro-lifers one of their biggest wins since before they lost Roe to get their bill through.  We are completely through the looking glass here.

Some notes from around the country on the impending health care vote:

Four Illinois House Dems (Melissa Bean, Jerry Costello, Bill Foster and Deborah Halvorson) remain undecided and would not return phone calls to the Chicago Tribune yesterday.

Quote of the day, from Bart Stupak: "Everything they can possibly throw at me is being thrown at me. They attack me personally, where I live, my integrity, everything. This is a vicious town when they turn on you."

Oregon Rep. Peter Defazio "vowed to vote against the measure unless Medicare payments to doctors in Oregon and several other states are increased."

Indianapolis Star write up on Brad Ellsworth announcing his yes vote.

Florida adds two votes in the "yes" column: Suzanne Kosmas and Allen Boyd.

Dina Titus (D-NV) says she will vote for the health care bill because, "the public is demanding this." She may not have seen the polls. Her Nevada colleague Shelley Berkley will also vote yes. Both were yes votes on the original House bill.

Rep. Scott Murphy "quit playing coy" and came out in favor of health care.

Former Congressman David Bonior recalls the power of the Presidency in whipping crucial votes:

Even with all that, Bonior said the tools at his disposal as a House whip paled in comparison to the persuasive power of the White House.

An opponent of the North American Free Trade Agreement when it was debated by Congress in 1993, Bonior found himself on the opposite side of the Clinton administration on the issue.

"We had about a 25-vote lead going into the last two weeks. The President basically opened the store and people came down to the White House one by one and asked for things — roads, bridges, educational grants, fund-raisers," Bonior said.

"One by one I watched the lead disappear," he said. "The power of the presidency is huge."

A new Research 2000 poll (600 LVs, 3/15-17, MoE +/- 4%) commissioned by Daily Kos shows Democrats still trailing in the open-seat Kentucky Senate race. In the primaries, Rand Paul (R) continues to lead the establishment favorite, Secretary of State Trey Grayson, while Lt. Gov. Dan Mongiardo (D) looks to have stretched his lead over Attorney General Jack Conway (D).

Primary Election Matchups
Mongiardo 47 (+10 vs. last poll, 8/31-9/2)
Conway 31 (+1)
Und 14 (-4)

Paul 40 (+15)
Grayson 28 (-12)
Und 18 (+1)

General Election Matchups
Grayson 43 (-2) -- Mongiardo 38 (-3) -- Und 19 (+5)
Grayson 44 (-2) -- Conway 36 (-4) -- Und 20 (+6)

Paul 46 (+9) -- Mongiardo 37 (-5) -- Und 17 (-4)
Paul 45 (+8) -- Conway 39 (-2) -- Und 16 (-6)

Each primary subsample was 400 voters with a margin of error of +/- 5%. After the jump, a look at favorable ratings for the candidates and other officials.

(more...)

The White House this afternoon is touting two fresh endorsements for the health care legislation headed to a vote this weekend. Both the American Medical Association and the AARP have reiterated their support for reform, support which comes after a largely favorable CBO score as the White House and Democratic leadership hopes to lock up the votes to pass it in the House.

Now, White House officials are saying that President Obama will speak Saturday afternoon to the House Democratic caucus at the White House to make his final pitch. It appears as if a vote will indeed take place Sunday, though some late defections could of course change those plans.

There are various whip counts out there, but this one from the New York Times seems to give a good look at who the real undecideds are with just about 48 hours to go. They put the vote at 198 in favor and 200 against, with 33 votes still in play. If all of the 33 vote as they did last November, the bill would pass 218-213.

Public Policy Polling (D) has new numbers in a Republican presidential matchup (614 GOP primary voters, 3/12-14, MoE +/- 4%), showing the top contenders tightly matched about two years from the primaries.

2012 Primary Election Matchup
Romney 28
Huckabee 24
Palin 23
Paul 11
Other 6
Und 9

PPP's analysis:

"Romney's lead speaks to the fact that moderates could actually pick the GOP nominee in 2012. That's because there's gridlock among conservatives about who their preferred candidate is. Huckabee leads with 28% to 27% for Palin and 25% for Romney. But the former Massachusetts Governor has a large advantage with moderates, getting 35% to 17% for Palin and 16% for Huckabee. That significant edge with them gives him the overall lead.

The survey asked respondents if they think it's more important that Republicans nominate someone who can defeat President Obama, or someone who is conservative on every issue. It looks like electability trumps purity at this point, with 48 percent saying it's more important to nominate a winner compared to 42 percent who say a true conservative. Meanwhile, 43 percent say they think Sarah Palin can defeat Obama, while 38 percent say no.

Favorable Ratings
Palin 69 / 17
Romney 58 / 17
Huckabee 54 / 16

Yes, it's early. But Romney also led in a national ballot test by Gallup. Rasmussen's last such survey showed Huckabee in front.

The Obama machine is mobilizing its troops. An email from Obama's campaign list was sent nationally to supporters this morning. Example below is an NYC version:

Friend --

This is it: After months of hard work, the final vote on health reform in the House of Representatives is expected Sunday. It's a chance to make history and finally give Americans control over their own health care -- but it's shaping up to be incredibly close, and every member of Congress will play a critical role.

So we're aiming for 3,024 calls to Rep. Maloney from New York before offices close this evening. Whether you've called your representative before or haven't yet spoken out on health reform, it's now time to raise your voice.

Your representative, Rep. Carolyn Maloney, has stood with the President and fought for reform since last year. But with special interests attacking anyone who pushes for change, it's important for voters in your district to call and say "thank you for fighting for reform."

As an active constituent, your voice has particular weight with your representative -- so all those who share our commitment to reform are depending on you to speak up. According to our records, you live in New York's 14th congressional district.

Please call Rep. Maloney's office at (202) 225-7944 right now -- and then click here to let us know so we can track our progress.

After a century of false starts and a year of grueling negotiations, we may be just hours away from real health insurance reform in America.

But if we fail, our next chance may not come for a generation.

You make the call.

Dial Rep. Maloney's office at (202) 225-7944 right away. Folks across the country will be calling, so if you get a busy signal, please try again.

http://my.barackobama.com/FinalMarchCalls

Let's win this thing,

David Plouffe

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett (D) trails both potential Republican opponents in the open-seat governor's race in Wisconsin, according to a new Rasmussen poll (500 LVs, 3/16, MoE +/- 4.5%).

General Election Matchups
Neumann 46 (+2 vs. last poll, 2/17)
Barrett 42 (unch)
Und 8 (-2)

Walker 48 (-1)
Barrett 42 (+2)
Und 8 (-2)

Walker leads Barrett by 3 in the RCP Average.

The GOP primary is September 14.

The CBO has offered a preliminary scoring, the legislation is online, the weekend is cleared, and now House Democrats just need to find the votes.

Do they have the votes yet? "I'm not giving a number out because I don't know that number," House Majority Whip James Clyburn said this morning on MSNBC's "Daily Rundown."

One group of Democrats still not on board is the Bart Stupak 12, who are holding out for stricter language ensuring the federal government will not fund abortions. "We're looking at different options" that will allow them to vote for the bill, Stupak said this morning on ABC's "Good Morning America." "There's been no lockdown yet. We're still negotiating."

Democratic leadership is pushing for a Sunday vote. The House will gavel into session Saturday at 9 a.m. and Sunday at 1 p.m.

"After months of hearings, discussions and deliberations on health care reform, the House will remain in session this weekend as we move toward completing our work on this critical issue," Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said in annoucing the schedule.